Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

1 Bump

Local governments will purge approx 500,000 workers in the coming year, thoughts?

To cover for lost tax revenues, local governments will fire nearly 500,000 workers in the coming year, according to a national survey of counties and cities released Tuesday.

The National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties, and the U.S. Conference of Mayors found that 270 local governments planned to collectively lay off 8.6 percent of their workforce from the previous fiscal year to the next one. That percentage of all local public sector workers across the country amounts to 481,000 people. The report's authors expect local governments to make even more spending cuts in the near future.

"Local governments across the country are now facing the combined impact of decreased tax revenues, a falloff in state and federal aid and increased demand for social services," the report notes.


Asked by sweet-a-kins at 10:29 AM on Jul. 28, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 34 (67,502 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (14)
  • Our sheriff's dept just cut a bunch of deputees and they closed more than half the beds in the jail. The saddest thing is they had just as much money to spend this year as last year. Where did the $$ go? Our sheriff's dept is the "go to" for "rescue" in this state. Our country spends boatloads of money every winter rescuing people. Our sheriff is very fond of his boat patrol. We have more boats patrolling more lakes than any other in the state. The misuse of funds is is now the people suffering.

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 4:11 PM on Jul. 28, 2010

  • *shaking head....

    stuff like this is why I tend to agree with the economists that predict later ends to the recession.

    municipalities are in trouble, but I still see denalis with municipal plates, and I'll be da**ed if every time I get a letter back from a senator or rep it isn't on luxury gold tinged heavy weight paper.

    My question is, why are jobs always the first to go? Why not make smaller cuts which add up to crazy amounts of money?

    I went through this with managing my first restaurant, it was a budget nightmare, and the managers were always sending the team home and working their jobs to save budget dollars to rob peter to pay paul.

    Fixing the budget was as easy as pinching a penny of waste here and there- I never sent people home to save money...(until the day the minimum wage went up and i was on vacation and my dingbat boss hadn't planned for it, but that's another story.)

    Answer by lovinangels at 11:22 AM on Jul. 28, 2010

  • great!
    i mean, i am sorry for those that have lost and will lose their jobs, but shouldn't these cuts have been made 2 years ago when things got bad????
    really, the government has been operating like money has value just because they print it.
    there is sooo much waste in government!
    my husband is a chiropractor, and his application to medicare (a government run agency) is about 40 pages long, and invents its own's application is one page, and submittable on line.
    come on!
    why take 3 months to process an application when for profit and non profit businesses can do it in one week.
    it is time to start looking at the bottom line, don't you think?
    if you lost your job, would you go out and buy a vacation home? or hire a lawn service?
    you make appropriate cuts, when cuts happen to you, why should our government be any different?

    Answer by happy2bmom25 at 10:34 AM on Jul. 28, 2010

  • Here is the thing though. It is not going to be the higher ups with the big salaries that are going to lose their jobs, its going to be the police officers, fire fighters, emergency service workers, etc that they will cut back on. In return, the community will be the ones that suffers.

    Answer by JeremysMom at 10:47 AM on Jul. 28, 2010

  • right.
    but, it is our money!!!
    why have we for so long let them waste it?
    why have we for so long tolerated the politics?
    i am happy about the tea party's.
    our nation is ready!

    Answer by happy2bmom25 at 10:42 AM on Jul. 28, 2010

  • 270 local ...collectively lay off 8.6 percent of their workforce ....across the country amounts to 481,000 people...

    270 local, not state, local will lay off 8.6% equaling 481,000 people. These have to been very large municipalities. How many of the "laid off" are natural attrition of retirees, jobs ending, and just not re-hiring?


    Answer by jesse123456 at 11:03 AM on Jul. 28, 2010

  • The federal government won't be doing it. but it's good that many states don't feel state workers deserve preferential treatment over others. I like the fact that many local governments realize they have to include themselves in cutbacks.

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 12:40 PM on Jul. 28, 2010

  • Here in our area (unemployment is +17%) the nearest large city has tried to cut wages, freeze pay, added furlough days, and what happened: the fire/police unions have sued the city. Everybody wants the governments, large and small, to live within whatever funds they receive but they agree only so long as it isn't any kind of cut that effects them personally. Example: the local library was facing large budget defficet, solution early retirement, a few lay-offs and reduced hours and services; public reaction: protesters in front of every library the city had, whining about "it's not fair" "find the money somewhere else", no congrats for balancing a budget, just bitching cause they were going to lose "their" library services.

    When are people gonna wake up and realize we can't have everything we demand from our government.


    Answer by emptynstr at 1:00 PM on Jul. 28, 2010

  • I guess they're catching up with California, then.

    At the local city-gov't level, for YEARSwe have been reducing: parks staff from dozens down to 6, public works & City Hall staff are down, Firefighters & Police are way down; teachers laid off, schools closed ...

    Perhaps CA gov't is not tightening the belt at the upper level of bureaucracy where they have power, and they shield their own jobs while cutting the budgets of lower-level, local gov'ts.

    Jesse 1-6 makes an important point that so much ELSE could be cut before jobs.
    But, since gov't jobs create a drag on the economy more than they help to power it up, then they do need to be reduced. (I think Wash DC should be cut first !)

    The economy's like a BIG wagon. Gov't spending and gov't jobs are riding IN the wagon. The ONLY ONES actually on the ground pulling that wagon are PRIVATE BUSINESS ! Including nasty ole corporations.



    Answer by waldorfmom at 1:53 PM on Jul. 28, 2010

  • sweet-a-kins

    Comment by sweet-a-kins (original poster) at 10:29 AM on Jul. 28, 2010